Confusion

If there is one thing that I have learned during the past four years of water testing, it’s that I really have gotten confused. Nothing is simple about our water problems and the solutions are very hard to find.
In the following column, I will try to explain what I mean.
I have gotten reports that the water coming from mine discharges is more related to frack water than mine wastes, yet it is coming out of the mine water. This is very confusing. Where did this water originate and who is responsible for the water being in the mine discharges? One thought is that there is a briny layer of water near the coal layer and it has leached into the mine. This may or may not be true. What this concept leads to is this: Where has it been before 2008? Why is there so much bromide in the water? From where are the high levels of strontium, salt, Sodium, Thorium, etc., coming? There are many more questions than answers.
The lab tests that have come back have been very controversial. For example, the water tested in the Mon River at and above the intakes at Tri-County water. Above the intake, the Bromide reading was 170 ppb/L, yet, at the intake down river, the Bromide reading was 200 ppb/L. How can that be? One would think that down river would be more diluted or at least the same in concentration. Why would the Bromide level be higher?
Another example: Why is the water being discharged for the mines very similar to frack water in chemical composition? It would seem to me that the water from the so-called “briny layer” would not contain the same chemicals as frack water. Where it came from may never be solved. The fact is that it is here. Now what do you do with the stuff and who is going to pay the bill? It was not the taxpayers who dug into the Earth for coal or who drilled for oil and gas, but I will bet you the taxpayer will pick up the bill.
Where the bromides are coming from is one thing, but the cleanup must be done immediately. There are ways to clean-up this problem but they are costly. When all of this started, there was no long-range planning as to how to address the new problems with the drilling for Marcellus gas. There should be a severance tax for any clean-up problems.
Let me give you one more example. When the Dilworth Mine was tested a few years ago, its discharge had a reading of 19.2 mg/l or 192,000 ppb. In our first sample of the discharge this year, the reading was 18.7 mg/l or 187,00 ppb. The latest reading from the lab showed almost no Bromides. I am confused about the results.
As you can see from the examples, they seem to be all over the place. The one thing for sure is that the presence of Bromide is higher then it should be coming from coal mining. How it got to this level may never be revealed, but someone knows. The main thing now is, “What is the state Department of Environmental Protection going to do about it?” They cannot ignore the problem. It will not go away and it can not be ignored.
These Bromides are the main part of the Trihalomethane problem and we know that Trihalomethane causes cancer. With this in mind, the source of the problem becomes secondary to the health issues.
The task at hand is how to deal with this problem. The best way to deal with the problem is to not let the Bromides enter our drinking water system to begin with. There are methods to remove these Bromides but they are expensive.
So, what does one do? Do we not check the problem and let our family, friends and all who are affected by drinking water pay the toll for a few to make money? Presently in the state Supreme Court, there is a hearing on Article 1 section 27 that guarantees all of us clean air and water. This Article was passed unanimously by both houses and voted into law by the public. Now industry wants the law and its power to be changed. Let us hope that this law always stays on the books the way it is written.
We must all work together to solve this problem and ask for God’s guidance to find a just solution.